24th edition – Defense – Pike & Hurricane

The Acquisition

EditorChief — Sat, 02 Apr 2016 11:10:33 +0000

This contribution was voted the winner of the 2016 Pike & Hurricane Writing Contest. Click here to read the article that was ranked second.

That day I acquired the tool at the heart of all resistance, the instrument lurking behind both the merciless wrath of the oppressor and the fierce resistance of the oppressed. It was a specific moment in history, the great political awakening of my generation – a verdict that was only established in hindsight as none of us seemed particularly aware of it at the time. For years we had been living in total dominion – our fate in the hands of people who seemed to understand our struggles so little. But how could they? It is in the nature of such extraordinary human dissonance that those in power seem to pursue their own ends, and while they might claim that their actions are directed toward your benefit, the simple fact of being at the mercy of the hand that feeds you, renders your exposure all the more palpable.

We were slaves to one of the greatest power asymmetries in human history, yet our predicament went beyond the relation to our rulers – though it certainly constituted the locus of our frustration: never had we had the freedom to have a say in who should govern us and for how long. We found ourselves at both center and periphery of society. Those in power seemed to categorically ignore us, and it would not be far-fetched to say that we were systematically marginalised, particularly when it came to decisions concerning us as constituency. Control was at the heart of everything. We were under constant influence, again, without knowing it – the people whom we loved most, heavily invested in this nation-wide conspiracy. Those in power seemed to understand the importance of our generation from the get-go and stopped at nothing short of social conditioning tactics, particularly through education (to make us into “good citizens”) utilising both of what Foucault had formerly identified as punishment and normalisation in shaping our behavior.

Within this environment, I began to grow increasingly critical of the mundane. For years, had I ignored the obvious, had never learned to focus on what was right in front of my eyes – seemingly always distracted by a flood of frivolities so commonly employed in a consumer society with a propensity to shut down all sorts of deviant spiritedness. (Only years later would I learn about the surveillance that was employed in virtually all households containing ‘us’ who had been identified as sleepers long before we became aware of it ourselves.) Now, the critical mind only had to be translated into action. However lucky I had been to come thus far – to even recognise the strength of my own voice after all those years of enduring silence – this was the moment that would separate the men from the boys. I stood in awe, just before this great breakthrough, a revolution, that might soon penetrate all layers of social life, if only I was brave enough to move from theory to praxis. The question remained how? How could we break free from our chains? How do you go about breaking chains that so many around you have not even identified as chains? How do you emancipate an entire generation that has from the beginning been shut off from the outside world, denied access to critical inspiration, starved from political awareness? We were suffering a heavy case of paternalism. But as with all great political uprisings in history, the emancipation of the group follows the enlightenment of the individual – me finding my voice, my personal epiphany laying the ground work for the years to come. So it happened.

That day I acquired the tool at the heart of all resistance. All those moments of denial, of silent opposition, fragments of years of endured infantilisation perpetrated by the culprits, the creators, behind the golden cage of my pathetic existence culminated in this once in a lifetime moment. And boy did it have an impact: the acquisition constituting my first step toward both political and personal maturity. Surely, I was far from mastering its utility but soon would its usage spread from me – and others around me who had independently discovered its powerfulness as well – to the rest of our peers that had yet to establish their righteous place in this world.

The acquisition left my rulers jaw-dropping, gaping into the void of what was soon to become their fading grip over my existence. They knew it was the beginning of the end. Or the end of the beginning I should rather say. To my surprise however, their terror soon gave way a tender acceptance, and from that point on I—as so many others that simultaneously found their way out of the silence—became more and more included into the decision making processes that governed our lives.

I was two years old. And I had just acquired the word “no.”

By Huple

Image credit:

Picture 1: Jemma D, licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

Picture 2: Chris Devers, licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

The post The Acquisition appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

NATO Membership: Better Defence at a Lower Cost

Yaroslav Mikhaylov — Sat, 02 Apr 2016 11:10:33 +0000

This opinion piece is part of a two-part series. Click here to read the anti-NATO article.

Since Sweden signed the Memorandum of Understanding with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in September 2014, a lively debate has emerged in Swedish government and civil society about whether it is time for Sweden to move to a full membership of the alliance. NATO is a military alliance originally created in the early days of the Cold War to defend Europe’s democratic states from an attack by the Soviet Union. Though it was never called into action during that conflict, it remains to this day as an alliance of Western European and North American nations including many members of the European Union and three of the five Nordic countries. Only Sweden and Finland are not members.

There are many ways in which joining NATO could benefit Sweden and its national defence, but this article focuses on three major ones: an increase in efficiency of the Swedish armed forces for both domestic and expeditionary missions, codifying and normalizing Sweden’s already-existing ad-hoc arrangements and joint missions with NATO, and as protection against the continuing threat that Russia poses towards the Nordic states.

From the start, we have to remember that Sweden is a small country, especially compared to global powers like the United States, Russia or China. It lacks the funding and manpower to have the large and varied military required to stand up to a major power. Without membership in an alliance, Sweden itself has to pay for and maintain a wide range of modern military capabilities that it rarely uses. Membership in NATO would allow Sweden to rely on its allies for some of the more expensive capabilities such as strategic air lift or signals intelligence. This in turn would enable Sweden to field more effective and up-to-date military forces at a far lower expense than if it had to maintain the same level of capabilities on its own. It would also make it easier for Sweden to participate in joint operations, that, due to its small size, almost all of its military activity consists of.

Furthermore, Sweden would gain additional leverage when exporting the products of its own technical expertise to the alliance, such as its SAAB Gripen fighter plane that has already been adopted by several NATO states. Working together with other NATO countries can show off the effectiveness of Sweden’s domestically-developed technology and entice other members to adopt it. Sweden would have greater say in what equipment gets used in joint NATO operations, allowing it to further promote Swedish products. These concerns mean that full membership in NATO would benefit not only the Swedish defence forces, but Sweden’s economy as well.

Opponents to Sweden’s NATO membership frequently cite Sweden’s historical neutrality as a reason to avoid the foreign entanglements that alliance ties bring. However, Sweden is already deeply involved in global security issues in ways that can hardly be described as neutral. Firstly, as a member of the European Union, Sweden is already part of a defensive alliance through Article 42 of the Treaty on European Union. Outside of Sweden and Finland, only Austria, Ireland and Cyprus are members of the EU without being members of NATO. Since an attack on any single NATO member is considered as an attack on every NATO member and an attack on an EU member is an attack on all of the EU, Sweden is already indirectly pledged to defend NATO and vice versa.

Sweden also acts far less neutrally now than it has historically. It has plenty of military commitments outside its borders and many of them are in cooperation with the EU, NATO or both. Swedish armed forces are deployed in over 20 countries with 14 missions outside of Sweden. This is not to mention the already-existing cooperation between Sweden and NATO, including intelligence sharing, joint military exercises and cyber defence. Joining NATO would not impose many new military commitments on Sweden, but it would make the existing ones clearer and easier to manage.

While Europe is no longer a potential battleground for a world war between opposing ideologies, NATO remains oriented towards defending Europe from threats from the East. Since the dissolution of the Soviet Union, some scholars and politicians have suggested that Europe no longer needs to be protected from Russia and many critics of Sweden’s potential NATO membership have turned to those missives as support for their cause. However, in many ways, Russia is still one of the biggest military threats to Sweden. Sweden’s domestic intelligence service SäPo, for instance, named Russia as Sweden’s number one security threat in 2014.

This is no surprise given the Russian armed forces’ incursions into both the Swedish waters and airspace. Especially worrying was its 2013 practice for a nuclear attack on Stockholm. Clearly, Russia already views Sweden as a potential enemy even without it becoming a NATO member state, dispelling the idealistic notion that neutrality will keep Sweden from being drawn into a potentially nuclear conflict. Notably, the Russian bombers practicing the nuclear assault were intercepted not by the Swedish defence forces, but by Danish aircraft flying as part of a NATO mission, highlighting just how important cooperation with NATO is to Sweden’s national security.

Opponents of Sweden’s NATO membership point out the various costs and dangers joining the alliance would impose on Sweden. However, Sweden already faces the same risks NATO opponents decry. It is already participating in many missions abroad and it is already a potential target for Russian aggression. However, joining NATO will allow Sweden to streamline those foreign commitments and make its armed forces more efficient by reducing the redundant capabilities it needs to invest in. It will also provide new markets for Sweden’s domestic defence industry as full membership would give Sweden more influence on NATO procurement processes and help build trust in its exports. Most importantly, however, membership in NATO would give Sweden agency and allow it to take part in shaping the modern world rather than simply observing from the sidelines.

Related articles:

Sweden, NATO and Cyber Security – Interview with Carl Bildt

Photo credits:

Cover picture: Spc. Justin De Hoyos, U.S. Army. Public domain. Edited by Michael Schätzlein.

Picture 1: Alan Wilson, licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0

Picture 2: Spc. John Cress Jr., U.S. Army. Public domain.

The post NATO Membership: Better Defence at a Lower Cost appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

Why Sweden Should Not Join NATO

Michael Schätzlein — Sat, 02 Apr 2016 11:10:33 +0000

This opinion piece is part of a two-part series. Click here to read the pro-NATO article.

It has been one and a half years since a pixelated picture of something sparked one of the largest military manoeuvres in recent Swedish history. Despite all efforts, the object was never found. The suspect was quickly named – Russia was credited with the elusive alleged submarine. It marked yet another incident in a long row of Swedish submarine scares spanning back all the way to 1962. However, many doubts were raised concerning the veracity of the picture, and both Russian and Western experts suspected the Swedish military of staging the event in order to push for more funding. It was not an isolated incident, though. It was the end of 2014, the conflict in Ukraine was in full motion, and the sabre-rattling of both Western and Russian forces had drowned out all calls for peace. In Swedish public debate, the subject of NATO – long a no-no – was on the table yet again. But there are good reasons why Sweden has not, and should not join NATO.

The first thing that comes to mind when looking at the pro-NATO side of the story is how mind-boggling it is that it is discussed under all the wrong pretexts. Russia is neither interested, nor capable of attacking or even conquering Sweden, despite all bellicose statements pointing to the contrary. While Russia’s military is surely a force to be reckoned with, its military budget is only a tenth of NATO’s. Russia does not stand a chance in conventional warfare. Even when considering all other actors in the region, Sweden is in no particular danger. Statements like the one made in 2012 by then Supreme Commander of the Swedish Armed Forces, Sverker Göransson, that Sweden would only be capable to defend itself for a week are cheap fear-mongering and hold no connection to reality.

Sweden has neither a large Russian minority, nor a common history that would enable Russia to make a claim on Swedish lands and legitimise its actions towards its own people. If anything, Russia will direct its gaze towards Eastern Europe, the South Caucasus, or the Central Asian countries. Rather than ogling Swedish territory, Russia is interested in keeping Sweden out of NATO. Joining simply for the sake of defying Russia would be a childish and erroneous decision.

Since Sweden has previously deployed troops in Afghanistan, holds joint exercises with NATO, and contributes to NATO’s rapid response forces, it can be said to have abandoned its treasured principle of neutrality. However, the additional decision-making powers praised by the pro-NATO faction are minimal, while the diplomatic consequences would be severe. Pushing away Russia will not open up for a peaceful process or an increase in stability in the Ukrainian conflict – rather, it will only complicate things again, and threatens to render the considerable progress that has been made so far null.

It should also be noted that Sweden is quite a pacifist society, and has enjoyed a longer period of peace than many other European countries. Combat actions would only garner limited approval from the population. When Sweden signed the Memorandum of Understanding with NATO in 2014, marking a strengthening in Sweden-NATO relations, and thus allowing the stationing of NATO troops in Sweden, it did so in a hasty process, without due prior deliberations. This was criticised by many people, and politicians from Miljöpartiet presented a motion to the Riksdag in which they demanded that the negotiations be halted until the case had been properly assessed.

One of the inevitable consequences of joining NATO will be the marked increase in military spending. In 2014, NATO members pledged to increase their defence budget to 2% of their GDP until 2024. Since Sweden currently can only account for 1.2%, it will have to redistribute quite a bit of its resources amid a weak economy, an education system suffering from too-low spending and a congested housing market. Devoting funds to fending off an imaginary threat can hardly be justified.

Finally, the issue of Sweden joining NATO should also be viewed on a larger scale. Sweden is heading toward militarism if the demands of its hardliners are met. They would be following in step with the scourge of militarism that has loomed over Europe and large parts of the world and humanity, which has reaped bitter harvests from warfare. Sweden will have to decide whether it shall betray majority interests, economy, its principles of non-alignment, and strong development aid for a NATO whose forces have rarely been used for the common good. Peace must be brought by peaceful means, not by guns and bombs.

Photo credits:

Cover picture: Marc Riboud, edited by Michael Schätzlein

Picture 1: European Union Naval Force Somalia Operation Atalanta, licensed under CC BY-ND 2.0

Picture 2: Ulrika, licensed under CC BY-ND 2.0

The post Why Sweden Should Not Join NATO appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

Technological Advancements: Those Forgotten and Left Behind

EditorChief — Sat, 02 Apr 2016 11:10:33 +0000

This contribution was voted the winner of the 2016 Pike & Hurricane Writing Contest. Click here to read the article that was ranked first.

February 14, 1876 Alexander Graham Bell was awarded the first telephone patent. Now, 140 years later, the old system is receiving its pension. We are tearing down the old copper wires for a transition to mobile phones and stationary phones connected with wireless technology, a brilliant future. The process did not start yesterday, but has been ongoing for a couple of years now. One thing that concerns me is the level of ignorance towards all of those who live either in the 16% of our country’s area where there are natural reasons for low or none reception. Centralisation is not only fueled by politicians as it is an indirect ongoing process. It has the potential of leading to a depopulation of more rural regions while those responsible will preach of our open landscapes that are a fading reality.

I remember receiving a call while working with the technical support team for one of Sweden’s largest phone providers. An old man was living alone in the outskirts of Lapland in northern Sweden, he had called multiple times with a cellphone for which he had to walk seven kilometers uphill to get reception, just to be told that service was on the way. This time he was totally devastated. They were not fixing the problem, they were removing the old wire, his lifeline to civilisation. As he cried in my ear, he explained that with no wire and no reception he was cut off, what if something happened to him. There was simply no way that I could do much to ease his situation. There was just one thing I could do, find out why Skanova [a network capacity seller] was tearing it down.

When I contacted the owner of the wire they acknowledged that they had personnel in the area working with the issue the old man had called about. When confronted with the fact that the wire was being removed, they seemed quite surprised. After searching through their orders for that region, the person I spoke with found an explanation: there were “too many errors on the wire and only one customer, it was unprofitable to repair…”

When I bluntly told her about the situation this old man was facing she still insisted that it was not of their concern and that we as a service provider should install the cellphone alternative. This was despite her knowing there was no reception and simply no way that my company would spend the money needed to guarantee a working phone.

I was fighting a losing battle.

Sadly I have no knowledge of what occurred after I parted with the old man. Maybe he was forced to move or maybe he continued to live the rest of his days out in the remote parts of Sweden. I neither know nor does this story tell. My intention is to bring awareness of what is going on. While living in a big city and having all the comforts needed it is easy to forget the harsh reality of our dying countryside. This is something I can hardly see as unique to Sweden, but as a phenomena happening whenever technology advances. Maybe you can relate?

I think it is important to be aware of how decisions are taken without sufficient knowledge, or as in this case, while ignoring that knowledge. We are the ones creating the future and it is on us to decide if we will leave people behind.

I will remember, remember those who were left behind due to our efforts to proceed into the future. Will you? Maybe you will not be affected directly but when people cannot live rurally, people will move. Farmers will stop cultivating their farms, villages and even small towns will turn into empty shells only habited by ghosts as they all move to the cities. We already see a domino effect with housing prices skyrocketing. By killing the country side and its possibilities in order to flourish we create new problems. It is time to handle the consequences of those who are ignored and for future decisions, no longer hesitate learning about the reality we will decide upon.

By Jean Don Norsass

Image credit:

Picture 1: gato-gato-gato, licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

Picture 2: brittgow, licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0

The post Technological Advancements: Those Forgotten and Left Behind appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

Easter Rising Centenary, Northern Ireland and the British-Irish Relations

Evgenia Isaeva — Sat, 02 Apr 2016 11:10:33 +0000

The year of 2016 marks the centenary of the Easter Rising that took place in Dublin, Ireland. It was an uprising against the British rule and one of the decisive steps undertaken by Irish people in the struggle for independence of Ireland from the United Kingdom. After several days of fighting, the rebellion was suppressed by the British resulting in hundreds of causalities among civilians and the execution of sixteen Irish rebel leaders. However, the Irish never gave up, and only six years later, in 1922, they eventually won what they were fighting for as an outcome of the Irish War of Independence. Yet, they lost some part of the territory, namely six counties in the northeast of the island that today constitute Northern Ireland. That is how the partition of Ireland occurred and the island got divided into the Irish Free State, which became the Republic of Ireland in 1937, and Northern Ireland that opted to remain a part of the United Kingdom.

Peace Walls in Belfast, Northern Ireland

This year a series of events to commemorate those who fought a hundred years ago were held in the Irish capital of Dublin at the end of March. Although, the rebellion of 1916 took place between the 24^th and 29^th of April, the centenary was celebrated almost a month earlier due to the fact that the event itself is connected with Easter. As this holiday is a moveable feast, this year’s Easter Sunday and the climax of celebration fell on the 27^th of March.

Initially, the Irish government wanted to invite the British royals to Dublin to participate in the state commemorations, however, later it was announced that the event was a moment of national commemoration and no foreign representatives would be invited.

In general, the British royals are not frequent visitors to Ireland. In fact, the first official visit ever of the Queen of the United Kingdom to the Republic of Ireland only took place in 2011. Then, in 2015, Prince Charles also went to Ireland for the first time officially. During his time there he had a meeting with the leader of the republican political party Sinn Féin Gerry Adams. The two events signify a definite improvement of relations between these two neighbouring countries that share a long contradictory history of hostilities and wars. Nevertheless, during the last few years, Ireland and the United Kingdom have been getting more intertwined in various sectors. They now have close ties when it comes to politics and economy, which proves that the relations between the Irish and the British have become better. But what about the political situation in Northern Ireland now?

Throughout the 20^th century, especially after the 1960s, the territory of Northern Ireland was a rather troublesome place. The population of this country was divided into two large groups: the Catholic republicans, who supported unification of Ireland and therefore identified themselves as Irish, and the Protestant unionists, who preferred staying in the UK and considered themselves British. For more than 30 years, a period of time known as “The Troubles”, Northern Ireland was basically a warzone where these two groups were fighting against one another. For several decades, the notorious Irish Republican Army (IRA) was terrorising not only Northern Ireland but also other parts of the United Kingdom and continental Europe. The Good Friday Agreement of 1998 helped improve the situation. Once it was signed, the Republic of Ireland stopped claiming Northern Ireland under its constitution, which decreased the violence in the country.

Even though, the conflict seems to be over now, there are still some things that serve as a reminder of those eerie past events. Among them are the political murals, which are propaganda paintings, and a series of barriers, called “Peace Walls” in Northern Ireland that were built in the cities of Belfast, Derry, Portadown, and elsewhere in the 1970s for the purpose of segregating Catholics and Protestants and minimising the violence between these two groups. Although, the walls were supposed to be temporary constructions, they are still standing today. In fact, they were even consolidated after the peaceful Good Friday Agreement in 1998. And nowadays, the walls as well as the political murals are among the hotspots for tourists who visit Belfast in order to get a grasp of the history of the Troubles in Northern Ireland.

A couple of years ago, the future of the walls was determined. The government of Northern Ireland decided that by 2023, Peace Walls should be removed. However, not everyone is sure that tearing down the walls is a good idea. Many people in the country are concerned about it. In their opinion, taking down the walls could be a reckless decision since the residents themselves requested them to be erected before.

Even though the war is a relic of the past, the political situation in Northern Ireland is still rather fragile. News about clashes of the extremists with the police, or blast bombs being detonated around the country by the IRA members emerge occasionally. Therefore, people still prefer the walls to be there and separate Catholic and Protestant neighbourhoods.

Since this year is quite important for the Republic of Ireland, many security concerns arise. The police are concerned about new waves of violence by extremist groups that might spill out to the country from its northern neighbour. Currently the police in both the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland are on alert.

The ongoing debate on whether the UK should exit the EU also aggravates the political instability. The above mentioned party of Sinn Féin, whose primary goal is to bring about a united Ireland, appeals to the British government to hold a border call in the event of Brexit. The officials in the United Kingdom announced that they had no interest in keeping Northern Ireland within the Union. The question of whether Irelands should be unified is up to the people to decide. According to a poll held in 2014, a strong majority in Northern Ireland were in favour of the referendum, but still preferred staying in the UK.

However, since the situation in Northern Ireland is still quite unstable and people do not seem completely ready to let go of the past, it is difficult to predict what to expect in case Northern Ireland exists the UK. The risk of new murderous riots resuming in the country is quite high. Thus, for now it is probably better to maintain the status quo and not to undertake any assertive action.

By Evgenia Isaeva

Image Credit: Evgenia Isaeva

The post Easter Rising Centenary, Northern Ireland and the British-Irish Relations appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.